Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

The Hebrew word ragia which is translated as 'FIRMAMENT' means 'DOME.' The spherical dome that surrounds our solar system. How was that dome created?

This is one scientific theory as to the creation of our solar system, whether or not it is the best theory that we have today, time will tell. This theory states, that the process of the division of the waters [gaseous elements of our Solar nebula cloud] from the greater Galactic nebula cloud, began some five billion years ago, and that the whole process began with the division of the water above, from the waters below from which the entire Solar system was created. This took just a few hundred million years, about 400 million years in fact, and the creation of our entire solar system was completed by about 4.6 billion years ago

It was from the galactic nebular cloud=waters, which was the residue of the heaver elements that were exploded off with the great super nova, which was the death of a massive earlier generation Star, from which residue, our Milky Way galaxy would be formed as the active universal forces brought about a division of the waters above from the waters below.

The accretion of the galactic nebula disk transferred angular momentum outward as it transferred mass inward, it was this that caused our solar nebula to begin to rotate and condense inward, bringing about a division of the solar cloud=waters, from the galactic cloud=waters, or the waters above from the waters below.

Within the greater galactic nebular cloud, which was slowly beginning to revolve around the Black Hole that anchored it in space, which Hole was the massive centrally condensed system into which a greater and earlier generation star had collapsed, a piece of the larger cloud complex started to collapse about five billion years ago.

The cloud complex had already, been "polluted" with dust grains from previous generations of stars, so it was possible to form the rocky terrestrial planets as gravity pulled the gas and dust together, forming a solar nebula. As the cloud=waters of the solar nebula collapsed, its slight rotation increased. This is because of the conservation of angular momentum.

Just like a dancer who spins faster as she pulls in her arms, the cloud began to spin as it collapsed. Eventually, the cloud grew hotter and denser in the centre, with a disk of gas and dust surrounding it that was hot in the centre but cool at the edges. As the disk got thinner and thinner, particles began to stick together and form clumps. Some clumps got bigger, as particles and small clumps stuck to them, eventually forming planets or moons.

Near the centre of the cloud, where planets like earth formed, only rocky material could stand the great heat. Icy matter settled in the outer regions of the disk along with rocky material, where the giant planets like Jupiter formed. As the cloud continued to fall in, the centre would get so hot that it would eventually become a star and blow away most of the gas and dust from which the planets of the solar system had been formed with a strong stellar wind.

By studying meteorites, which are thought to be left over from this early phase of the solar system, scientists have found that the solar system is about 4.6 billion years old!

As the solar nebula collapsed, the gas and dust heated up through collisions among the particles. The solar nebula heated up to around 3000 K so everything was in a gaseous form. The solar nebula's composition was similar to the present-day Sun's composition: about 93% hydrogen, 6% helium, and about 1% silicates and iron, and the density of the gas and dust increased toward the core where the proto-sun was: [PROTO SUN, it had not at that time become our sun]. The inner, denser regions collapsed more quickly than the outer regions.

Around Jupiter's distance from the proto-Sun the temperature was cool enough to freeze water (the so-called "snow line" or "frost line" ). Further out from the proto-Sun, ammonia and methane were able to condense. When the solar nebula stopped collapsing it began cooling, though the core that would later form the Sun remained hot. This meant that the outer parts of the solar nebula cooled off more than the inner parts closer to the hot proto-Sun.

Only metal and rock materials could condense (solidify) at the high temperatures close to the proto-Sun. Therefore, the metal and rock materials could condense in all the places where the planets were forming. Volatile materials (like water, methane and ammonia) could only condense in the outer parts of the solar nebula.

Because the density of the solar nebula material increased inward, there was more water at Jupiter's distance than at the distances of Saturn, Uranus, or Neptune. The greater amount of water ice at Jupiter's distance from the proto-Sun helped it grow larger than the other planets. Although, there was more water closer to the proto-Sun than Jupiter, that water was too warm to condense.

Material with the highest freezing temperatures condensed to form the chondrules that were then incorporated in lower freezing temperature material. Any material that later became part of a planet underwent further heating and processing when the planet differentiated so the heavy metals sunk to the planet's core and lighter metals floated up to nearer the surface.

Because of its great compression, the core of the proto-Sun finally reached about 10 million Kelvin and after the planets of the solar system had been created, the hydrogen nuclei started fusing together to produce helium nuclei and a lot of energy.

It was then that the Sun "turned on" and produced the strong winds called T-Tauri winds named after the prototype star in the constellation Taurus. These winds swept out the rest of the nebula that was not already incorporated into the planets. With most of the cocoon gas blown away, the new star itself, which was created after the planets, became visible to the outside for the first time. This whole process took just a few hundred million years and was finished by about 4.6 billion years ago.

The Oort cloud or the "pik"Oort cloud (named after Jan Oort), is a spherical cloud of predominantly icy objects that may extend up to roughly 50,000 AU, or nearly a light-year, from the Sun. This places the cloud at nearly a quarter of the distance to Proxima Centauri, the nearest star to the Sun. The Kuiper belt and the scattered disc, the other two reservoirs of trans-Neptunian objects, are less than one thousandth of the Oort cloud's distance. The outer limit of the Oort cloud defines the cosmographical boundary of the Solar System and the region of the Sun's gravitational dominance..

The Oort cloud is thought to comprise two separate regions: a spherical outer Oort cloud and a disc-shaped inner Oort cloud, or Hills cloud. Objects in the Oort cloud are largely composed of ices, such as water, ammonia, and methane.

At the distance of about one light year from the earth, is the great spherical icy Dome, that is the boundary of the expanse of our heavens, in which the planets, moons, and the sun of our solar system were created.

I believe that the "SON OF MAN" who descended through space-time and inspired his prophets to record his words which could be understood by earlier generations of man, and revealed that the planets of our solar system were created before our sun, and spoke of the spherical dome which is the boundary of our solar system, also spoke of the spherical planets, which may not found in the canon of scriptures that were gathered by the Jewish authorities.

Just as a point of interest as it may come into the conversation at a later date, In 2005, a large object beyond Pluto was observed in the Kuiper belt.

A few astronomers think that there might be another planet or companion star orbiting the Sun far beyond the orbit of Pluto. This distant planet/companion star may or may not exist. The hypothesized origin of this hypothetical object is that a celestial object, perhaps a hard-to-detect cool, brown dwarf star (called Nemesis), was captured by the Sun's gravitational field. This planet is hypothesized to exist because of the unexplained clumping of some long-period comet's orbits. The orbits of these far-reaching comets seem to be affected by the gravitational pull of a distant, Sun-orbiting object.

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Correct. Christians will attempt to retro-fit Hebrew cosmology to what science has discovered but it is obvious desperation as Gentorev shows us. This is what the Hebrews had in mind and it bears no relationship to reality:

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

No it doesn't. Next.....

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Look up at the moon when it is full. Is it a circle? Yes. Is it flat? , no. Where do you people get this illogical nonsense?

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

No word for sphere idiot. Really, where do uneducated dolts like you come from? There was a word for flat. It was not used, do the math genius.

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

Wrong, nice equivocation fallacy though, it means it now, it didn't mean it then dummy. A bad argument as usual.

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".Wrong, you have absolutely no proof what was in the mind of the person who wrote it.He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

No it doesn't. Next.....

Yes it does, but whatever.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Look up at the moon when it is full. Is it a circle? Yes. Is it flat? , no. Where do you people get this illogical nonsense?

No, the moon is not a circle. It is a sphere. The moon may APPEAR circular from earth, but that doesn't mean it IS a circle. But the bible is inspired by an omniscient God, so limited visibility shouldn't be problem for God...right?

But I can already see you are flinging insults like a pissed off baboon, so it appears you get very emotional about these things. Have a bath, change your nappies and then reply back when your calm. You just sound like an uneducated redneck (I assume your not).

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

No word for sphere idiot. Really, where do uneducated dolts like you come from? There was a word for flat. It was not used, do the math genius.

The very next paragraph disproves what you said. Also, a circle is flat by nature. You can't have a non-flat circle. Thats like saying "They referred to fire, but they never said it was hot! Haha you idiot!". You can't have a non-hot fire, just like you can't have a non-flat circle.

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

Wrong, nice equivocation fallacy though, it means it now, it didn't mean it then dummy. A bad argument as usual.

How have I made an equivocation fallacy? And I have no Idea what you mean by "it means now not then". Please explain.

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".Wrong, you have absolutely no proof what was in the mind of the person who wrote it.

Yes I do. It's called "reading". Usually you think about something before you write it down. You're obviously an exception.

Isaiah was referring to the "circle of the earth", using Hebrew words that never once indicated sphericity. You can't get any damn clearer than that.

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Thank you for a link to an actually comprehensive article. You probably should have pasted that at the start of your reply to cut out all the emotional charged garbage you produced.

Nonetheless, the article simply states that the Hebrew word for ball or sphere (dur) is also used for circle or encircle (such as Isaiah 29:3).

I agree, but I still maintain that if Isaiah 40:22 was referring to a spherical earth, the Hebrew word "dur" would have been more appropriate.

Nowhere in the bible is the Hebrew word for circle (chug, which is what Isaiah uses) used to mean "sphere" or "ball". Nowhere. Not even close.

When describing the earth, the Hebrew word "dur" is much much more appropriate. Though it can mean different things other than "sphere" or "ball", it is much better then "chug", which means circle or vault.

How would you describe the earth:

A: Vault/circleB: BallC: Egg

Your time starts now...

"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

How do you 'stretch out a canopy... like a tent' over a sphere? Or arrange grasshoppers on a globe? Clearly a flat earth is assumed. A flat earth can be imagined as being essential circular or square - square was favoured in ancient China, but a circular (flat) earth was adopted right across the ancient middle east from Egypt to Mespotamia.

Isaiah was expressing the dominant and widespread belief of the age and place that the world was flat and circular.

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Curious as to where you read in the bible that the world is flat. There aren't many references outside of Isaiah and in Isaiah there is not enough said to make a decision either way.

Well Isaiah uses the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug). Never has the Hebrew word for "circle" meant "sphere" anywhere else. A circle is flat by definition so yes I'm pretty sure the conclusion is fairly definitive.

Second, why is this important to you? Does it matter which it is?

Not particularly, no.

"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Nobody cares whether the Bible say's "circle" or "round" or "sphere" or whatever the stupid argument is, it's only the atheists that nit pic stuff like this.Are people grasshoppers as well? Are the heavens an actual tent? Does God sit on a throne above the earth? Holy Spirit you guys don't know figurative from your back sides.https://lovelifeduo.files.wordpress.com...

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

The Hebrew word ragia which is translated as 'FIRMAMENT' means 'DOME.' The spherical dome that surrounds our solar system. How was that dome created?

What dome "surround[ing] our solar system"? Have you got pictures of it? What's it made of?

This is one scientific theory as to the creation of our solar system, whether or not it is the best theory that we have today, time will tell. This theory states, that the process of the division of the waters [gaseous elements of our Solar nebula cloud] from the greater Galactic nebula cloud, began some five billion years ago, and that the whole process began with the division of the water above, from the waters below from which the entire Solar system was created. This took just a few hundred million years, about 400 million years in fact, and the creation of our entire solar system was completed by about 4.6 billion years ago

Water =/= clouds of gasesWater =/= nebulaWater can be part of the above, but they are not synonymous...clearly...

Besides, you claims make no sense at all: "the whole process began with the division of the water above (above what?), from the waters below (?), from which the entire solar system was created."

Furthermore, the Hebrew word for "waters" (mayim) just means water. Not clouds or nebula.

If the bible was referring to clouds of gases or nebula, "ed" (which means literally "mist) would have been much more appropriate.

It was from the galactic nebular cloud=waters, which was the residue of the heaver elements that were exploded off with the great super nova, which was the death of a massive earlier generation Star, from which residue, our Milky Way galaxy would be formed as the active universal forces brought about a division of the waters above from the waters below.

No, nebula cloud =/= water. Again, a nebular can be made up partially of water, but it is isn't water itself. To say otherwise is ridiculous. That's like saying

The accretion of the galactic nebula disk transferred angular momentum outward as it transferred mass inward, it was this that caused our solar nebula to begin to rotate and condense inward, bringing about a division of the solar cloud=waters, from the galactic cloud=waters, or the waters above from the waters below.

No, now your inserting words into the bible writers mouth. Again, water isn't a NEBULA and vice versa. You were sounding very scientific until that point.

Within the greater galactic nebular cloud, which was slowly beginning to revolve around the Black Hole that anchored it in space, which Hole was the massive centrally condensed system into which a greater and earlier generation star had collapsed, a piece of the larger cloud complex started to collapse about five billion years ago.

Cool

The cloud complex had already, been "polluted" with dust grains from previous generations of stars, so it was possible to form the rocky terrestrial planets as gravity pulled the gas and dust together, forming a solar nebula. As the cloud=waters of the solar nebula collapsed, its slight rotation increased. This is because of the conservation of angular momentum.

Just like a dancer who spins faster as she pulls in her arms, the cloud began to spin as it collapsed. Eventually, the cloud grew hotter and denser in the centre, with a disk of gas and dust surrounding it that was hot in the centre but cool at the edges. As the disk got thinner and thinner, particles began to stick together and form clumps. Some clumps got bigger, as particles and small clumps stuck to them, eventually forming planets or moons.

Tis true. Unfortunately, the bible doesn't mention a fifth of what you just said.

Near the centre of the cloud, where planets like earth formed, only rocky material could stand the great heat. Icy matter settled in the outer regions of the disk along with rocky material, where the giant planets like Jupiter formed. As the cloud continued to fall in, the centre would get so hot that it would eventually become a star and blow away most of the gas and dust from which the planets of the solar system had been formed with a strong stellar wind.

Again, not found in bible.

By studying meteorites, which are thought to be left over from this early phase of the solar system, scientists have found that the solar system is about 4.6 billion years old!

I know! Amazing hey! It's unfortunate that God never once said anything scientific in the bible.

As the solar nebula collapsed, the gas and dust heated up through collisions among the particles. The solar nebula heated up to around 3000 K so everything was in a gaseous form. The solar nebula's composition was similar to the present-day Sun's composition: about 93% hydrogen, 6% helium, and about 1% silicates and iron, and the density of the gas and dust increased toward the core where the proto-sun was: [PROTO SUN, it had not at that time become our sun]. The inner, denser regions collapsed more quickly than the outer regions.

K

Around Jupiter's distance from the proto-Sun the temperature was cool enough to freeze water (the so-called "snow line" or "frost line" ). Further out from the proto-Sun, ammonia and methane were able to condense. When the solar nebula stopped collapsing it began cooling, though the core that would later form the Sun remained hot. This meant that the outer parts of the solar nebula cooled off more than the inner parts closer to the hot proto-Sun.

K

Only metal and rock materials could condense (solidify) at the high temperatures close to the proto-Sun. Therefore, the metal and rock materials could condense in all the places where the planets were forming. Volatile materials (like water, methane and ammonia) could only condense in the outer parts of the solar nebula.

K

(To be continued)

"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Nobody cares whether the Bible say's "circle" or "round" or "sphere" or whatever the stupid argument is, it's only the atheists that nit pic stuff like this.

Nit pick? God is supposed to be omniscient. If he gets such a fundamental fact wrong in the bible, that is a huge blow to Christianity. Besides, I prefer the term "critical thinking".

Are people grasshoppers as well? Are the heavens an actual tent? Does God sit on a throne above the earth? Holy Spirit you guys don't know figurative from your back sides.https://lovelifeduo.files.wordpress.com...

The bible clearly says "like grasshoppers" and "like a canopy" and "like a tent". These are all similes, and obviously to be regarded as figurative.

God may sit on a throne above the earth, but that's fairly irrelevant.

However, the verse explicitly states that he is enthroned above the "circle of the earth". Not "the earth which is like a circle".

"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

Because the density of the solar nebula material increased inward, there was more water at Jupiter's distance than at the distances of Saturn, Uranus, or Neptune. The greater amount of water ice at Jupiter's distance from the proto-Sun helped it grow larger than the other planets. Although, there was more water closer to the proto-Sun than Jupiter, that water was too warm to condense.

There some water on Uranus *snigger*.

Material with the highest freezing temperatures condensed to form the chondrules that were then incorporated in lower freezing temperature material. Any material that later became part of a planet underwent further heating and processing when the planet differentiated so the heavy metals sunk to the planet's core and lighter metals floated up to nearer the surface.

most of what you've said is pretty accurate, but I still don't see the connection between water or nebula.

To be continued.

"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

Because of its great compression, the core of the proto-Sun finally reached about 10 million Kelvin and after the planets of the solar system had been created, the hydrogen nuclei started fusing together to produce helium nuclei and a lot of energy.

K

It was then that the Sun "turned on" and produced the strong winds called T-Tauri winds named after the prototype star in the constellation Taurus. These winds swept out the rest of the nebula that was not already incorporated into the planets. With most of the cocoon gas blown away, the new star itself, which was created after the planets, became visible to the outside for the first time. This whole process took just a few hundred million years and was finished by about 4.6 billion years ago.

K

The Oort cloud or the "pik"Oort cloud (named after Jan Oort), is a spherical cloud of predominantly icy objects that may extend up to roughly 50,000 AU, or nearly a light-year, from the Sun. This places the cloud at nearly a quarter of the distance to Proxima Centauri, the nearest star to the Sun. The Kuiper belt and the scattered disc, the other two reservoirs of trans-Neptunian objects, are less than one thousandth of the Oort cloud's distance. The outer limit of the Oort cloud defines the cosmographical boundary of the Solar System and the region of the Sun's gravitational dominance..

K

The Oort cloud is thought to comprise two separate regions: a spherical outer Oort cloud and a disc-shaped inner Oort cloud, or Hills cloud. Objects in the Oort cloud are largely composed of ices, such as water, ammonia, and methane.

K

At the distance of about one light year from the earth, is the great spherical icy Dome, that is the boundary of the expanse of our heavens, in which the planets, moons, and the sun of our solar system were created.

K

I believe that the "SON OF MAN" who descended through space-time and inspired his prophets to record his words which could be understood by earlier generations of man, and revealed that the planets of our solar system were created before our sun, and spoke of the spherical dome which is the boundary of our solar system, also spoke of the spherical planets, which may not found in the canon of scriptures that were gathered by the Jewish authorities.

And this is when you lose it. Damn it, you were really on a roll there!

Just as a point of interest as it may come into the conversation at a later date, In 2005, a large object beyond Pluto was observed in the Kuiper belt.

K

A few astronomers think that there might be another planet or companion star orbiting the Sun far beyond the orbit of Pluto. This distant planet/companion star may or may not exist. The hypothesized origin of this hypothetical object is that a celestial object, perhaps a hard-to-detect cool, brown dwarf star (called Nemesis), was captured by the Sun's gravitational field. This planet is hypothesized to exist because of the unexplained clumping of some long-period comet's orbits. The orbits of these far-reaching comets seem to be affected by the gravitational pull of a distant, Sun-orbiting object.

Definitely not a star, but yes, there definitely could be another planet beyond Pluto.

Thank you for the astronomical history lesson, but you haven't even touched on the topic of this thread at all.

"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Curious as to where you read in the bible that the world is flat. There aren't many references outside of Isaiah and in Isaiah there is not enough said to make a decision either way.

Well Isaiah uses the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug). Never has the Hebrew word for "circle" meant "sphere" anywhere else. A circle is flat by definition so yes I'm pretty sure the conclusion is fairly definitive.

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Nobody cares whether the Bible say's "circle" or "round" or "sphere" or whatever the stupid argument is, it's only the atheists that nit pic stuff like this.

It's called finding evidence, not nit pic stuff. It's not a stupid argument as it shows the mindset of the authors of the bible and shows whether or not the bible can be considered the word of God, who should be able to tell us if the Earth is flat or is a sphere, considering he created it, right?

Are people grasshoppers as well? Are the heavens an actual tent? Does God sit on a throne above the earth? Holy Spirit you guys don't know figurative from your back sides.https://lovelifeduo.files.wordpress.com...

Then, you are admitting the Bible is figurative, and it is YOU who has the authority to make that statement. LOL.

Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Curious as to where you read in the bible that the world is flat. There aren't many references outside of Isaiah and in Isaiah there is not enough said to make a decision either way.

Well Isaiah uses the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug). Never has the Hebrew word for "circle" meant "sphere" anywhere else. A circle is flat by definition so yes I'm pretty sure the conclusion is fairly definitive.

Second, why is this important to you? Does it matter which it is?

Not particularly, no.

How do you interpret Job 26:10 ?

I think Job is talking about the horizon of the sea. If you go out far enough into the sea on a boat, the ocean horizon looks completely circular, hence why he said that God compasses a circle onto the sea where the sun sets.

I'm very sure this is what Job is talking about, because I myself have personally seen this.

"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Curious as to where you read in the bible that the world is flat. There aren't many references outside of Isaiah and in Isaiah there is not enough said to make a decision either way.

Well Isaiah uses the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug). Never has the Hebrew word for "circle" meant "sphere" anywhere else. A circle is flat by definition so yes I'm pretty sure the conclusion is fairly definitive.

Second, why is this important to you? Does it matter which it is?

Not particularly, no.

How do you interpret Job 26:10 ?

I think Job is talking about the horizon of the sea. If you go out far enough into the sea on a boat, the ocean horizon looks completely circular, hence why he said that God compasses a circle onto the sea where the sun sets.

I'm very sure this is what Job is talking about, because I myself have personally seen this.

Yeah so Job looking out probably considered that the world may be round. During Isaiah's time the world is round theory was already out. Like i said to me it matters not but I think there is no conclusive evidence from either side. The word Job uses for compassing is the same word used in Isaiah. Im not sure if the word (02329 // gwx // chuwg // khoog // ) is used anywhere else. Maybe you know?

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

No it doesn't. Next.....

Yes it does, but whatever.

More argument ad nauseam...typical ..And you have a degree in ancient languages from what university?

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

No you seem to not recognize a difference between the circle of the Earth and the Earth is a circle.

Look up at the moon when it is full. Is it a circle? Yes. Is it flat? , no. Where do you people get this illogical nonsense?

No, the moon is not a circle. It is a sphere. The moon may APPEAR circular from earth, but that doesn't mean it IS a circle. But the bible is inspired by an omniscient God, so limited visibility shouldn't be problem for God...right?

Lol? A sphere is a circle dummy when viewed from only one angle.

But I can already see you are flinging insults like a pissed off baboon, so it appears you get very emotional about these things. Have a bath, change your nappies and then reply back when your calm. You just sound like an uneducated redneck (I assume your not).

You simply are a buffoon.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

No word for sphere idiot. Really, where do uneducated dolts like you come from? There was a word for flat. It was not used, do the math genius.

The very next paragraph disproves what you said. Also, a circle is flat by nature. You can't have a non-flat circle. Thats like saying "They referred to fire, but they never said it was hot! Haha you idiot!". You can't have a non-hot fire, just like you can't have a non-flat circle.

Circle don't exist in reality dummy, therefore a circle reference cannot describe anything in the real world. You conveniently ignore this mathematical tidbit to kvell over your own nonsense.

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

Wrong, nice equivocation fallacy though, it means it now, it didn't mean it then dummy. A bad argument as usual.

How have I made an equivocation fallacy? And I have no Idea what you mean by "it means now not then". Please explain.

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".Wrong, you have absolutely no proof what was in the mind of the person who wrote it.

Yes I do. It's called "reading". Usually you think about something before you write it down. You're obviously an exception.

Isaiah was referring to the "circle of the earth", using Hebrew words that never once indicated sphericity. You can't get any damn clearer than that.

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

Thank you for a link to an actually comprehensive article. You probably should have pasted that at the start of your reply to cut out all the emotional charged garbage you produced.

Nonetheless, the article simply states that the Hebrew word for ball or sphere (dur) is also used for circle or encircle (such as Isaiah 29:3).

I agree, but I still maintain that if Isaiah 40:22 was referring to a spherical earth, the Hebrew word "dur" would have been more appropriate.

Nowhere in the bible is the Hebrew word for circle (chug, which is what Isaiah uses) used to mean "sphere" or "ball". Nowhere. Not even close.

When describing the earth, the Hebrew word "dur" is much much more appropriate. Though it can mean different things other than "sphere" or "ball", it is much better then "chug", which means circle or vault.

How would you describe the earth:

A: Vault/circleB: BallC: Egg

The Earth isn't a ball moron. A ball is something that children and adults throw. Its called context. You simply should avoid this recondite discussion.

The very next paragraph disproves what you said. Also, a circle is flat by nature. You can't have a non-flat circle. Thats like saying "They referred to fire, but they never said it was hot! Haha you idiot!". You can't have a non-hot fire, just like you can't have a non-flat circle.

So then, you have never seen a magician holding fire in his hand, and you have never heard of "Cool Fire?"

I Googled this up for you; "Cool flames were accidentally discovered in the 1810s by Sir Humphry Davy, who noticed that certain types of flame did not burn his fingers or ignite a match. He also found that those unusual flames could change into conventional ones and that at certain compositions and temperatures, they did not require an external ignition source, such as a spark or hot material. Harry Julius Emel"us was the first to record their emission spectra, and in 1929 he coined the term "cold flame".[

At 2/6/2016 7:05:36 AM, AWSM0055 wrote:Bible implies very strongly that the earth is flat.

Isaiah 40:22 is often cited by Christians to prove that the bible says that the earth is round:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Christians seems to conveniently ignore the fact that a circle is a flat, 2D round object, both in English and in Hebrew.

Nearly every bible translation translates the Hebrew word for "circle" (chug, pronounced "khoog") to the English word "circle", and there's a reason: BECAUSE "CIRCLE" IN HEBREW MEANS "CIRCLE" IN ENGLISH YEH DUMB CHRISTIAN TWATS!

*cough* erm, sorry for that outburst...I'll continue my point...

But can't "circle" in Hebrew also mean "sphere"? No, because it's an entirely different word (the Hebrew word for "sphere" or "ball" is "dur" (pronounced "dure"). Isaiah 22:18 uses it in fact).

So what's my point? My point is that if Isaiah was referring to a spherical earth in Isaiah 40:22, he would have used the Hebrew alternative "dur", and not "chug".

He obviously didn't. Why didn't he? Why did Isaiah say that the earth was a circle and not a sphere?

At 2/6/2016 1:20:37 PM, keithprosser wrote:"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

How do you 'stretch out a canopy... like a tent' over a sphere? Or arrange grasshoppers on a globe? Clearly a flat earth is assumed. A flat earth can be imagined as being essential circular or square - square was favoured in ancient China, but a circular (flat) earth was adopted right across the ancient middle east from Egypt to Mespotamia.

Isaiah was expressing the dominant and widespread belief of the age and place that the world was flat and circular.

Do you have basic reading comprehension? Or does this gross misunderstanding only happen when you read the Bible?

Do you know what a "Simile" is? A simile is a figure of speech that makes a comparison, showing similarities between two different things. Unlike a metaphor, a simile draws resemblance with the help of the words "like" or "as".

At 2/6/2016 1:20:37 PM, keithprosser wrote:"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

How do you 'stretch out a canopy... like a tent' over a sphere? Or arrange grasshoppers on a globe? Clearly a flat earth is assumed. A flat earth can be imagined as being essential circular or square - square was favoured in ancient China, but a circular (flat) earth was adopted right across the ancient middle east from Egypt to Mespotamia.

Isaiah was expressing the dominant and widespread belief of the age and place that the world was flat and circular.

Do you have basic reading comprehension? Or does this gross misunderstanding only happen when you read the Bible?

Do you know what a "Simile" is? A simile is a figure of speech that makes a comparison, showing similarities between two different things. Unlike a metaphor, a simile draws resemblance with the help of the words "like" or "as".

Luke 17:34"36, Christ's Second Coming is portrayed as occurring while some are asleep at night and others are working at daytime activities " which means a rotating earth with day and night at the same time

"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

Douay-Rheims BibleIt is he that sitteth upon the globe of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as locusts: he that stretcheth out the heavens as nothing, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.Isaiah 40:22

"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

The very next paragraph disproves what you said. Also, a circle is flat by nature. You can't have a non-flat circle. Thats like saying "They referred to fire, but they never said it was hot! Haha you idiot!". You can't have a non-hot fire, just like you can't have a non-flat circle.

So then, you have never seen a magician holding fire in his hand, and you have never heard of "Cool Fire?"

I Googled this up for you; "Cool flames were accidentally discovered in the 1810s by Sir Humphry Davy, who noticed that certain types of flame did not burn his fingers or ignite a match. He also found that those unusual flames could change into conventional ones and that at certain compositions and temperatures, they did not require an external ignition source, such as a spark or hot material. Harry Julius Emel"us was the first to record their emission spectra, and in 1929 he coined the term "cold flame".[

The Hebrew term "chuwg" can also be translated as "ROUND." A ball is round, a globe is round, the earth, moon and the planets are round, and a circle is round.

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

Do you know what a "Simile" is? A simile is a figure of speech that makes a comparison, showing similarities between two different things. Unlike a metaphor, a simile draws resemblance with the help of the words "like" or "as".

The point of a simile is to illustrate something obscure by relating it to something more familiar. There is nothing familiar about spreading a canopy over a sphere, nor are grasshoppers on a globe a familiar sight. But Isaiah's hearers would know all about pitching tents on the flat of the desert ground, and of the grasshoppers often found there. Had Isaiah intended to imply a sphere he would not have used a simile that stresses the flatness of the ground.

There is no reason to think Isaiah believed in anything different from everybody else at that time and place - the earth was flat and circular.